Also don't forget about the actual rake being half of the rake of our competitors!
This would be true if Betcoin only raked what they said they would.
I believe they used to rake as advertised, however for at the past several weeks
at least,
Betcoin has been charging significantly more rake than advertised. This was brought to their attention by multiple players in multiple ways several weeks ago.
If anyone is surprised that Betcoin has chosen to do simply do nothing about it, I suggest you go back and read the last several pages of this thread.
Betcoins rake schedule as well as players comments and hand historys they have ignored can be found
HEREExample 1 4/8 NLHE, two players
Advertised rake - 1mbtc (2.5% capped at 1mbtc)
Actual rake - 5mbtc
Game ID: 10232096 4/8 Maribor - 2 (Omaha)
Seat 1 is the button
Seat 1: ungod (613.85).
Seat 2: theschrutedog (400).
Player ungod has small blind (4)
Player theschrutedog has big blind (8)
Player theschrutedog received a card.
Player theschrutedog received a card.
Player theschrutedog received a card.
Player theschrutedog received a card.
Player ungod received card: [Jd]
Player ungod received card: [7c]
Player ungod received card: [10d]
Player ungod received card: [8s]
Player ungod raises (20)
Player theschrutedog raises (64)
Player ungod calls (48)
*** FLOP ***: [4s 2c Jh]
Player theschrutedog bets (93.60)
Player ungod raises (421.20)
Player theschrutedog allin (234.40)
Uncalled bet (93.20) returned to ungod
*** TURN ***: [4s 2c Jh] [5s]
*** RIVER ***: [4s 2c Jh 5s] [9c]
------ Summary ------
Pot: 795. Rake 5
Board: [4s 2c Jh 5s 9c]
Player ungod shows: One pair of Js [Jd 7c 10d 8s]. Bets: 400. Collects: 0. Loses: 400.
*Player theschrutedog shows: Straight to 5 [10c 3s Ac 2s]. Bets: 400. Collects: 795. Wins: 395.
Game ended at: 2015/11/18 4:1:52
Example 2 .5/1 NLHE 3 players
Advertised Rake - 1mbtc (2.5% capped at 1mbtc)
Actual Rake - 3mbtc
Game started at: 2015/11/19 13:50:26
Game ID: 10263994 0.50/1 Aarhus (Omaha HiLow)
Seat 4 is the button
Seat 4: ervas (203.40).
Seat 5: btcjbtc (245.24).
Seat 6: ungod (100).
Player btcjbtc has small blind (0.50)
Player ungod has big blind (1)
Player btcjbtc received a card.
Player btcjbtc received a card.
Player btcjbtc received a card.
Player btcjbtc received a card.
Player ungod received card: [5d]
Player ungod received card: [Ah]
Player ungod received card: [Ac]
Player ungod received card: [4h]
Player ervas received a card.
Player ervas received a card.
Player ervas received a card.
Player ervas received a card.
Player ervas folds
Player btcjbtc raises (2.50)
Player ungod raises (8)
Player btcjbtc raises (24)
Player ungod raises (72)
Player btcjbtc calls (54)
*** FLOP ***: [Ad 4s Jh]
Player btcjbtc checks
Player ungod allin (19)
Player btcjbtc calls (19)
*** TURN ***: [Ad 4s Jh] [Ks]
*** RIVER ***: [Ad 4s Jh Ks] [6h]
------ Summary ------
Pot: 197. Rake 3
Board: [Ad 4s Jh Ks 6h]
Player ervas does not show cards.Bets: 0. Collects: 0. Wins: 0.
*Player btcjbtc shows: One pair of 6s [5c 6s 7d 5h] Low hand (A 4 5 6 7 ).Bets: 100. Collects: 98.50. Loses: 1.50.
*Player ungod shows: Three Of Kind of As [5d Ah Ac 4h]. Bets: 100. Collects: 98.50. Loses: 1.50.
Game ended at: 2015/11/19 13:51:17
Example 3 .5/1 NLHE, 5 players
Advertised Rake - 2 mbtc (2.5% capped at 2 mbtc)
Actual Rake - 6 mbtc
Game started at: 2015/11/14 17:53:36
Game ID: 10143163 0.50/1 Tokyo (Hold'em)
Seat 2 is the button
Seat 1: luismelo4 (107.34).
Seat 2: Cognative (338.25).
Seat 3: BitBandit (215.22).
Seat 4: nukemecca (168.95).
Seat 9: ungod (29.84).
Player BitBandit has small blind (0.50)
Player nukemecca has big blind (1)
Player BitBandit received a card.
Player BitBandit received a card.
Player nukemecca received a card.
Player nukemecca received a card.
Player ungod received card: [Qc]
Player ungod received card: [3c]
Player luismelo4 received a card.
Player luismelo4 received a card.
Player Cognative received a card.
Player Cognative received a card.
Player ungod folds
Player luismelo4 folds
Player Cognative raises (3)
Player BitBandit calls (2.50)
Player nukemecca raises (6)
Player Cognative calls (4)
Player BitBandit calls (4)
*** FLOP ***: [9s 3d As]
Player BitBandit checks
Player nukemecca bets (10.23)
Player Cognative calls (10.23)
Player BitBandit calls (10.23)
*** TURN ***: [9s 3d As] [4s]
Player BitBandit checks
Player nukemecca bets (33.59)
Player Cognative calls (33.59)
Player BitBandit folds
*** RIVER ***: [9s 3d As 4s] [4d]
Player nukemecca bets (57.94)
Player Cognative allin (287.43)
Player nukemecca allin (60.19)
Uncalled bet (169.30) returned to Cognative
------ Summary ------
Pot: 349.12. Rake 6. JP fee 0.01
Board: [9s 3d As 4s 4d]
Player luismelo4 does not show cards.Bets: 0. Collects: 0. Wins: 0.
*Player Cognative shows: Full House (3/4) [3s 3h]. Bets: 168.95. Collects: 349.12. Wins: 180.17.
Player BitBandit does not show cards.Bets: 17.23. Collects: 0. Loses: 17.23.
Player nukemecca shows: Two pairs. As and 4s [Ac Ks]. Bets: 168.95. Collects: 0. Loses: 168.95.
Player ungod does not show cards.Bets: 0. Collects: 0. Wins: 0.
Game ended at: 2015/11/14 17:54:35
Betcoin has known about this for 3 weeks, if not longer, so "honest mistake" is no longer a legitimate excuse.
At this point the only ethical options I can think of would be to
A - Determine exactly how much they have over-charged every player and issue refunds. (hands that were already refunded due to 100%rakeback promo obviously would not get refunded)
B - If it would take an unrealistic amount of effort to determine exact numbers, they could figure out some what to get an estimate, and issue every player a refund slightly higher than the estimate along with an explanation on how the arrived at that number (and an apology)
Obviously they won't do either.
In response to the inevitable responses pointing out their generous table starter promotion or fast cashout times:
Who cares, that doesn't give them the right to take more than they said they would.
Edit: Also I'd like to add that several months ago I pointed out to Betcoin Paul that they were overcharging at Heads Up Limit tables. I was never able to confirm if it was fixed since the game ran so rarely and now I'm banned - its probably never been right though.
